Criminals Use Scanners to Ambush Officers
This claim is not supported by evidence.
The Claim
Police departments argue that criminals monitor scanners to track officer locations and plan ambushes, making encryption necessary for officer safety.
The Evidence
Zero documented cases exist.
- Palo Alto, California: After a 3-year records search, police found 'no responsive records' of incidents where scanner access led to officer harm
- Broadcastify: The CEO of the world's largest scanner streaming platform states they have never received evidence of scanner-related officer harm in decades of operation
- Multiple police departments: When pressed for documentation during city council meetings, departments admit they have zero cases to cite
The Reality
If scanner access truly endangered officers, there would be incident reports, injury claims, case studies, or at minimum some anecdotal evidence. When departments are asked to provide proof, they have none. Meanwhile, criminals who want to track police have no shortage of alternatives:
- Real-time GPS apps (Waze, Google Maps) showing police locations
- Social media reports from bystanders
- Lookouts with cell phones
- Visual observation of marked police vehicles
The scanner ambush scenario is a theoretical concern with no documented basis in reality.
Bottom Line
When police departments make this claim, ask them for evidence. The documented facts don't support it.
Take Action for Transparency
Your voice matters. Here are concrete ways to advocate for open police communications in your community.
Contact Your Representatives
Use our templates to email your local officials about police radio encryption policies.
Get StartedRead Case Studies
See how encryption has affected real communities - from Highland Park to Chicago.
View CasesSpread Awareness
Share evidence about police radio encryption with your network and community.
Public Testimony
Learn how to speak effectively at city council and public safety meetings.
Prepare to Speak